I quickly downloaded the AP results by city for Massachusetts. Now Massachusetts is unique in the US, in that the entire state is divided in townships. Counties exist in name only and all local government functions are carried out by the township governments. Another way of putting this: There are no unincorporated parts of Massachusetts.

But, of course, the townships vary quite a bit in their size – both in area and in population. It was quickly clear from the AP table that Coakley had carried most of the largest cities in the state. She carried 10 of the 15 largest with 59% of the vote. She won Boston, Worcester, Newton, Springfield, Brockton, Brookline, Arlington, Medford, New Bedford, & Framingham. Brown won Quincy, Weymouth, Lowell, Barnstable, and Peabody. In those 15 towns/cities she collected 278,620 votes to Brown’s 193,063.

But Brown won 183 of the next 235 towns/cities and racked up an impressive total of 862,627 votes to Croakley’s 657,560.

Brown’s margin of 205,000 votes from the 2nd tier of 235 cities easily overcame Coakley’s margin of 85,000 from the top 15 cities.

In the 3rd and final tier of 75 towns/cities, Coakley won 54 and Brown only 21, with Coakley again winning 57.5% of the vote. But there just aren’t that many people in the small cities. In the 3rd tier she won 26,657 votes to Browns 19,695.

Conclusions: I think what the pattern shows is simply confirmation of the conventional wisdom. Coakley won the urban areas (and some significant liberal suburbs). Brown won the suburbs. And he won them with big enough margins that he won the state. It’s also a confirmation that you don’t have to win over every constituency in order to win an election. You have to win big on your turf and not lose too badly in areas outside your strengths.